- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: CPA firm's analysis shows higher taxes needed to support St George City
Posted on 12/20/14 at 9:53 am to LSURussian
Posted on 12/20/14 at 9:53 am to LSURussian
Russian...
Why isn't the City annexing Gardere?
Why isn't the City annexing Gardere?
Posted on 12/20/14 at 10:08 am to WindboyCajun
quote:I noticed in this morning's Advocate that the for profit development arm of the BRAF sold the Acadiana Village shopping center development for $32.1 million. The article, on page B4 of the print version but I can't find it online, mentions additional projects this BRAF affiliate has underway in Baton Rouge. Does BRAF have a monetary interest in preventing St. George from incorporating that they are not divulging in connection with the Faulk & Winkler report they commissioned? It sure seems like they do.
A total SHAM evaluation by this CPA Firm based on assumptions provided by BRAF and BRAC without contacting the organizers of St. George
Posted on 12/20/14 at 10:11 am to udtiger
quote:Have a majority of the property owners there submitted an annexation request petition?
Russian...
Why isn't the City annexing Gardere?
Posted on 12/20/14 at 10:12 am to Poodlebrain
quote:Such as? Stop being so paranoid.
Does BRAF have a monetary interest in preventing St. George from incorporating
Posted on 12/20/14 at 10:21 am to LSURussian
I don't know.
Is the Council or Mayor's office, or Mary Oliver Pierson, actively soliciting such requests like they did with all of these businesses ?
I wonder why?
Is the Council or Mayor's office, or Mary Oliver Pierson, actively soliciting such requests like they did with all of these businesses ?
I wonder why?
This post was edited on 12/20/14 at 10:25 am
Posted on 12/20/14 at 10:24 am to udtiger
quote:I don't know. Do you?
Is the Council or Mayor's office, or Mary Oliver Pierson, actively soliciting such requests?
quote:You wonder why what?
I wonder why?
Posted on 12/20/14 at 10:25 am to LSURussian
Stop feigning ignorance, it is unbecoming.
Posted on 12/20/14 at 10:31 am to udtiger
You're not making sense.
The city can't annex an area without a majority of property owners requesting their property to be annexed.
If a majority of property owners in the Gardere area submit an annexation petition, there is no doubt in my mind the CP council would annex the area.
Just as it has with all the other areas that have submitted petitions in the last 12 months, including that residential neighborhood off of Coursey Blvd last month or the month before.
And I have seen or read nothing that indicates the city or any of its representatives were "actively seeking" to annex that residential area. The property owners didn't want to be in SG so they took the initiative themselves and about 65% of the homeowners signed the petition.
ETA: here is a link to that annexation...
“We’ve been here all of our lives,” said Gloria Sicard, a Legacy Court homeowner. “St. George is something we just do not want.”
The city can't annex an area without a majority of property owners requesting their property to be annexed.
If a majority of property owners in the Gardere area submit an annexation petition, there is no doubt in my mind the CP council would annex the area.
Just as it has with all the other areas that have submitted petitions in the last 12 months, including that residential neighborhood off of Coursey Blvd last month or the month before.
And I have seen or read nothing that indicates the city or any of its representatives were "actively seeking" to annex that residential area. The property owners didn't want to be in SG so they took the initiative themselves and about 65% of the homeowners signed the petition.
ETA: here is a link to that annexation...
“We’ve been here all of our lives,” said Gloria Sicard, a Legacy Court homeowner. “St. George is something we just do not want.”
This post was edited on 12/20/14 at 10:36 am
Posted on 12/20/14 at 10:34 am to LSURussian
Don't be condescending, I know how it works.
MOP bragged about convincing the casino to "request" annexation.
You are being disingenuous.
MOP bragged about convincing the casino to "request" annexation.
You are being disingenuous.
Posted on 12/20/14 at 10:43 am to udtiger
quote:And I think you're being silly. Or maybe paranoid. Or racist.
You are being disingenuous.
What's easier to get, 10 signatures or hundreds?
There are some really upscale neighborhoods along Highland Road, and now on Burbank past Bluebonnet, that the city has not been "soliciting" (that I've heard of) to be annexed. Why? Because it's time consuming to get a majority of property owners when the number of property owners who must be contacted is in the hundreds.
If the property owners take the initiative and submit a valid annexation petition, the CP council will annex them. No doubt.
And there is no doubt more areas will request to be annexed and will be annexed before any SG election is held.
I don't understand why that concept is so difficult for you to comprehend.
ETA: One other thought....of course the city is more interested in annexing areas that have a significant tax base along with very little marginal expenses to annex them, such as additional police and fire protection.
Any large residential area does not fit both of those ideals, not just the Gardere area.
This post was edited on 12/20/14 at 11:06 am
Posted on 12/20/14 at 10:49 am to LSURussian
I am using my grandson's computer!
You are a total idiot just like the idiots that sit on the City Parish Council! Or it it that you are one and the same!
You are a total idiot just like the idiots that sit on the City Parish Council! Or it it that you are one and the same!
Posted on 12/20/14 at 11:08 am to WindboyCajun
quote:Ah, now I understand.......obvious dementia.
I am using my grandson's computer!
quote:Who are you callin' an 'it it', motherfricker?!
Or it it that you are one and the same!
Posted on 12/20/14 at 11:10 am to LSURussian
If the city of Baton Rouge is being subsidized by taxpayers from the unincorporated areas of East Baton Rouge Parish it enables residents of the city to pay lower taxes. If St. George incorporates then the amount of subsidies the city of Baton Rouge receives from unincorporated areas may decline, and it may be necessary for the city of Baton Rouge to increase taxes to continue providing the same services. Those increased taxes would decrease the value of BRAF's for profit development arm developments.
Posted on 12/20/14 at 11:22 am to Poodlebrain
quote:Key word that cancels out the rest of your post.
If
And here you were criticizing Faulk and Winkler for making assumptions in their study....
For the third year in a row the CP budget as submitted by the mayor was adopted without a single change. That means those councilmen who represent that poor, repressed, mistreated, neglected area that would become St George had no objections to how the budget treats their constituents.
Posted on 12/20/14 at 11:23 am to LSURussian
quote:
Mall of Louisiana, the new casino, Costco, Celtic Studio
May not pay the property taxes many businesses do. A good analysis of this question would probably reveal how stupid and convoluted our tax system is.
One way even retail developments with the right influence have avoided property tax is to have an industrial development board issue bonds to build their buildings and own their buildings while they service the bonds. This keeps the buildings off the tax rolls. Good examples, probably, are Bass Pro in Denham and Cabelas and the out buildings on the land the developers owned around them. I have served on one of these boards and saw it in action. It is a common practice on large developments. Much more common than one would suspect.
Indifferent to St. George debate
This post was edited on 12/20/14 at 11:26 am
Posted on 12/20/14 at 11:39 am to LSURussian
2 things:
1. The people that paid for the report have a vested interest in hurting the prospects of St. George happening, so immediately I know the report will be skewed if not a Big 4 accounting firm.
2. The accounting firm is Faulk and Winkler. I've never heard of that firm. They couldn't use a Big 4 firm to get some ironclad credibility?
1. The people that paid for the report have a vested interest in hurting the prospects of St. George happening, so immediately I know the report will be skewed if not a Big 4 accounting firm.
2. The accounting firm is Faulk and Winkler. I've never heard of that firm. They couldn't use a Big 4 firm to get some ironclad credibility?
Posted on 12/20/14 at 11:48 am to LSURussian
quote:
I can't wait to see them present an actual budget for voters to examine and not a one page scribbling on a napkin.
According to the Advocate the SG budget consisted of one page, almost as bad as scribbling on a napkin.
Posted on 12/20/14 at 12:47 pm to Shepherd
Exactly right sir
We need to hear both sides and the ball is now in SG's court.
If the election officials ever get to work an effective rebuttal will be vital to pass the initiative.
We need to hear both sides and the ball is now in SG's court.
If the election officials ever get to work an effective rebuttal will be vital to pass the initiative.
Posted on 12/20/14 at 1:05 pm to LSURussian
I don't see the report of one CPA firm as the definitive answer on what the SG budget will be. Maybe one data point in the discussion.
I think there will have to be some type of property tax increase (like Zachary did) to foster the change in the school system and associated new schools down the road. I don't think most would balk at $60 monthly ($720 annually) built into their house note if they had something to show for it. If you think the taxes in EBR aren't going up anyway that is doubtful.
There are also some opportunities for savings versus conducting business the way the CP does. One good example would be scrapping DPW and privatizing the building inspection and road maintenance.
I think the biggest challenge to SG is convincing people who have already left the public school system to vote for it. They have already paid the penalty of private school tuition with no refund of taxes paid in. If the property taxes go up in SG people who currently have kids in school will likely see no benefit before their kids move on to college.
I'm still pro-SG because I see the number of families that have to move out of the BR area because they can't afford private school for multiple kids. The great experiment of desegregation has failed and for the most part minorities go to public school and non-minorities go to private school in EBR.
Is SG a guarantee for better schools? Time will tell. It seems to have worked for Zachary and Central.
I think there will have to be some type of property tax increase (like Zachary did) to foster the change in the school system and associated new schools down the road. I don't think most would balk at $60 monthly ($720 annually) built into their house note if they had something to show for it. If you think the taxes in EBR aren't going up anyway that is doubtful.
There are also some opportunities for savings versus conducting business the way the CP does. One good example would be scrapping DPW and privatizing the building inspection and road maintenance.
I think the biggest challenge to SG is convincing people who have already left the public school system to vote for it. They have already paid the penalty of private school tuition with no refund of taxes paid in. If the property taxes go up in SG people who currently have kids in school will likely see no benefit before their kids move on to college.
I'm still pro-SG because I see the number of families that have to move out of the BR area because they can't afford private school for multiple kids. The great experiment of desegregation has failed and for the most part minorities go to public school and non-minorities go to private school in EBR.
Is SG a guarantee for better schools? Time will tell. It seems to have worked for Zachary and Central.
Posted on 12/20/14 at 1:19 pm to AndyCBR
quote:
Is SG a guarantee for better schools? Time will tell. It seems to have worked for Zachary
Zachary did not have a built in private school system in it.
The two closest private schools were Siliman (terrible school-worse than Zachary when in EBRPSS) and Redemptorist.
Most of Zachary kids already went to Zachary public schools and the town was invested heavily in the schools before the split.
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News